Seven profiles in Trump Supporters

There seems to be a great deal of mystery and consternation concerning where all the Trump support is coming from. To be clear, I’m biased against Trump. I’m comfortable categorically dismissing absolutely everything he stands for. But in the past few weeks, my Facebook feed has lit up with Trump support from quarters that I never expected. So, in the interest of fighting ignorance, I’m just going to throw a few profiles out here. These are actual people, with the names changed.

1: My eldest first cousin. He comes from a lower-middle class household. It was kind of a rough environment, his father died in his teens. He had a wild ungoverned youth, raised by our grandparents as best they could. He believes that Trump will stabilize the economy. He believes that Trump will also stabilize international conflicts by showing (and presumably) committing military strength to the problem. Although, he also believes that the US should avoid excessive foreign entanglements. I’m not going to tease this out any further.

2: My best friend’s wife. She’s a sorority gal from a southern university. My first enduring memory of her is when we were sitting around the apartment watching basketball. They cut to a black player for an interview, and she started mocking the way he talked. If there’s a word for blackface in speech, that’s what she was doing. She now runs a cannabis-oil pyramid scheme and is an enthusiatic supporter of both Trump and pot legalization.

3: Husband of a good friend. Interesting side note… his daughter is the subject of an internet meme that you would recognize instantly. He identifies as libertarian. I don’t know if it’s capital L or lowercase ‘ell’ and I don’t care. He seems like an OK dude, an economic pragmatist and social liberal. He’ll tell you he has friends of different races. Then he retransmits a horrifyingly racist and confrontational Pepe meme on Columbus Day, leaving no doubt that it’s intended to rile up the “offenderati”.

4: Girl I knew in high school who is now an elementary-school teacher. Because I suspect this informs her worldview, I will state she’s an exceptionally attractive and intelligent white woman who could have been a Miss Universe (but was not, to my knowledge). She has a mental deathgrip on anything that derides Obama or Hillary. She posted a thorough treatment of why she can live with Trump’s unfortunate comments about seducing married women, with no recognition that Trump would be happy to seduce her by popping a tic-tac, giving her a kiss, and grabbing her pussy if he felt like it. (You don’t need a cite, you already know he said this).

5: Several upper-class women from China who have immigrated to the US and married American men. Some of them lived through the Cultural Revolution. Some have seen their entrepreneurial parents stifled and manipulated by the Chinese communist parties. They believe that Trump represents the opposite of the bad things they experienced, and they are severely allergic to anything that sounds like socialism.

6: A number of white bros who hate Hillary. This goes back to 1993 when right-show talk radio was burgeoning, and liberals were giving them plenty of material to work with. I was a member of this segment back then. I did now, and I still do, wonder why an unelected person was given latitude to draft and pass sweeping healthcare regulations. I and many others felt this was an affront to due political process. Then there’s her unconditional acceptance of Bill’s sexual predation. Ultimately I accept that Hillary is the Democratic standard-bearer, and I’m glad she has now achieved this on her own merits. I think she’s qualified and I endorse her with no reservations. But for people who do see the failed healthcare attempt as an issue, and are primed to see her other flaws as existential, she’s provided them with plenty of ammunition.

7: Cynical rich people. These people care nothing about the governance of the country as long as they’re lining their pockets. They pick and choose legislation with no greater concern than whether it will make them richer. Rich enough for what? Money is a claim on future production. The human lifespan is hard-set at about 110 years, give or take. Yet these hardcore accumulators care only about the accumulation of wealth in excess of what they, their children, or grandchildren could ever use.

You can easily detect my bias in these examples, and I may have taken a couple of cheap rhetorical shots, but these are 7 Trump supporters as best I understand them. Talk amongst yourselves.

I don’t know what the debate is here–but if elected, Trump will not improve anything for any of these people, except #7.

There’s no debate. I expect it might devolve into a debate, but I’m not otherwise sure where this would go.

I’m just offering examples for those who ask “who are the Trump supporters”. Here are 7 of them. They’re not crazy or stupid, they just have certain priorities and mindsets that they believe Trump will serve. It’s not an exhaustive example, as now I realize I ignored the people who think ISIS is about to leave a flaming bag of poo on their doorstep. That would be candidate #1 and possibly a number of others.

Can I just pick you up on this? Because you’ve got it wrong. Firstly, money is a mutually-agreed medium of exchange. Secondly, the point about accumulating wealth for the generations is so that your line can survive a generation or two of indifferent scions and still remain wealthy for the generations.

Of course, for some rich people, money and wealth are just ways of keeping score.

#8. My Brother in Law (wife’s brother). In fact that whole side of the family except one nephew who is a Bernie fan. My BIL is very upper middle class, white, 62 years old. In the oil industry in Texas. He’s smart (CEO) funny and great to be around unless he starts talking politics. On a recent visit, he was going on about the comments that Trump has made about women. Lamenting that nothing is private anymore and guys talk like that all the time. Umm… no. No they don’t.

Which is more than enough reason to legislate it out of existence.

#9. My former neighbors, who are hard core fundamentalist Christians. To them Hillary is the devil, because she is ungodly, pro-choice and against LGBT discrimination, and will appoint Supreme Court justices accordingly. For them, it’s all about the Supreme Court. Trump’s behavior and black soul don’t matter to them as long as he appoints super-conservative justices to the Court, which he has promised to do. This is logic I can respect, because it’s true for me too, except that I want the Court to be the opposite of what they want.

We are both right. Money is a claim on a certain amount of future production . Currency is the medium by which we exchange these claims.

This was part of my argument. Morally speaking, I’m prepared to say people should be able to accumulate exactly 2 generations worth of wealth - the elder generation and the next generation - and there should be a marginal tax on that wealth. When we’re talking about money that will ensure your great-great-great grandchildren will be… that’s where we as a society need to step in and say “enough”.

Of course, for some rich people, money and wealth are just ways of keeping score.

I think Marx described this as the “fetishization of money”. This is fine as far as it goes, but there’s no reason someone should be empowered to collect rents on work that was done a generation before he was born.

That’s a good profile. However I take exception to all the apologists who say “No, this isn’t locker-room talk.” I rarely hear talk like that in the locker-room (or any males-only environment… but it IS out there. Quoting from Ghostbusters… “I’ve seen shit that would turn you white.” Even in that context, Trump’s out of line in saying he could just “grab <someone> by the pussy and get away with it because I’m powerful”. I imagine this is possible in the the wealthier golf locker-rooms. Back in my military days, there was some jaw-dropping sexism among the men (but to be fair, the women gave as good as they got). But it’s out there. That sexism is absolutely out there.

:confused: “Draft and pass”? I’m not sure you understand how legislation works.

In any case, Hillary Clinton as Chair of the Task Force on National Health Care Reform was no more and no less “unelected” than, e.g., National Security Advisor Sandy Berger, another Bill Clinton appointee who strongly influenced Clinton administration policies.

In fact, most of the policy advisors in a Presidential administration are unelected and not subject to Senate confirmation. The vast majority of all legislation is drafted (not passed) by unelected advisors. Hillary Clinton arguably received way more electoral scrutiny, as the high-profile spouse of a Presidential candidate, than most other unelected policy advisors do.

So while you may have legitimately objected to her policies, I don’t see why the mere fact of her being “unelected” is the part that stuck in your craw.

Why? Money and wealth are not zero-sum games. The more wealthy people there are the better.

Yeah, this is a completely bogus criticism that has everything to do with the culture war attacks on her that started during the 1992 campaign and nothing to do with legitimate gripes about policy or ethics.

I disagree. Every one of these people has demonstrated a shocking, fundamental failure of critical thinking. Each profile contains a description of an obvious flaw that correlates directly to either insanity and/or stupidity, and a common thread throughout them all is personal belief, a conflict of personal ideology, and profound selfishness.

My brother’s FIL is a hell of a nice guy, worked hard his entire life all over the country with all types of different people, and he’ll happily tell you stories about it all for as long as you’re willing to listen. And he is an ardent Trump supporter. I chalk it up to simply having lived in Bumfuck, West Virginia most of his life and that’s just what everyone else believes. Not a bad man, but when it comes to politics he simply parrots whatever he heard on FOX News without giving it any further contemplation at all.

A recent column in Cracked by David Wong (Jason Pargin) addresses a lot of these issues “How Half Of America Lost Its F**king Mind” — How Half Of America Lost Its F**king Mind |

The OP doesn’t present any of the people in a particularly positive light, but most of them sound like they would have been happier with Johnson. And, I’ll note, if the Republican base had moved to Johnson, it’s possible that they could have won against Hillary.

So good job on that, folks.

I disagree; I think I did the most charitable job possible. You’re right that many would have been happier with Johnson, and a few are waking up that fact. But that only pulls so much traction compared to a statement like “What’s Aleppo?”

Christ, I knew this in high school geography, a time when I had no business knowing things like that.

I dunno. I have to put one of my best friends in one of these baskets… someone who is intellegent and more well-read than I.

I’ve been posting on the SDMB for over a decade and, I think, regardless of whether one might agree with me, anyone looking through my posting history would agree that I’m a reasonably intelligent guy.

Personally, I couldn’t name the capitol of more than two states. If I ever need to know the name of a capitol, I’ll look it up. I’m more interested in knowing the broad strokes of history or whatever else, than rote memorization of trivia. I could name a few leaders of countries, but I’ll admit that I’d recognize a far greater number than I can think of out of thin air.

Different peoples’ minds work in different ways. An ability to remember trivia in the same way as others isn’t a particularly good metric on how smart they are. That the media ran wide with Aleppo rather than reporting his positions on issues was a pretty clear hatchet job on him. They could have easily presented him as the realistic alternative to Trump, but instead dismissed him out of hand, because Trump and the battle of worsts was a better story.

  1. Gun owners who fear that Hillary Clinton will do everything in her power- chiefly appointing anti-gun justices to the Supreme Court- to delegitimize the possession of firearms and work towards making the Second Amendment a dead letter as far as individual gun ownership goes.

You may think gun rights an insane position, and supporting Trump as the only alternative to Hillary monstrous, but gun owners’ antipathy to Hillary is rational given their position.

#10 - My father in law. Long dead, but an ignorant bully who would walk in on his daughter as she dressed, saying, “It’s nothing I haven’t seen before.” He’d’ve been all over Trump as a kindred spirit.